192 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12941516)
1. Software to compute and conduct sequential Bayesian phase I or II dose-ranging clinical trials with stopping rules.
Zohar S; Latouche A; Taconnet M; Chevret S
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2003 Oct; 72(2):117-25. PubMed ID: 12941516
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Phase I (or phase II) dose-ranging clinical trials: proposal of a two-stage Bayesian design.
Zohar S; Chevret S
J Biopharm Stat; 2003 Feb; 13(1):87-101. PubMed ID: 12635905
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The continual reassessment method: comparison of Bayesian stopping rules for dose-ranging studies.
Zohar S; Chevret S
Stat Med; 2001 Oct; 20(19):2827-43. PubMed ID: 11568943
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Bayesian decision sequential analysis with survival endpoint in phase II clinical trials.
Zhao L; Woodworth G
Stat Med; 2009 Apr; 28(9):1339-52. PubMed ID: 19226557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The continual reassessment method and its applications: a Bayesian methodology for phase I cancer clinical trials.
Ishizuka N; Ohashi Y
Stat Med; 2001 Sep 15-30; 20(17-18):2661-81. PubMed ID: 11523075
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Continual reassessment method: a likelihood approach.
O'Quigley J; Shen LZ
Biometrics; 1996 Jun; 52(2):673-84. PubMed ID: 8672707
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. A default method to specify skeletons for Bayesian model averaging continual reassessment method for phase I clinical trials.
Pan H; Yuan Y
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(2):266-279. PubMed ID: 26991076
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Continuous toxicity monitoring in phase II trials in oncology.
Ivanova A; Qaqish BF; Schell MJ
Biometrics; 2005 Jun; 61(2):540-5. PubMed ID: 16011702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. A simulation study of methods for selecting subgroup-specific doses in phase 1 trials.
Morita S; Thall PF; Takeda K
Pharm Stat; 2017 Mar; 16(2):143-156. PubMed ID: 28111916
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A utility-based Bayesian optimal interval (U-BOIN) phase I/II design to identify the optimal biological dose for targeted and immune therapies.
Zhou Y; Lee JJ; Yuan Y
Stat Med; 2019 Dec; 38(28):5299-5316. PubMed ID: 31621952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Adaptive design improvements in the continual reassessment method for phase I studies.
Heyd JM; Carlin BP
Stat Med; 1999 Jun; 18(11):1307-21. PubMed ID: 10399198
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparison of model choices for the Continual Reassessment Method in phase I cancer trials.
Paoletti X; Kramar A
Stat Med; 2009 Oct; 28(24):3012-28. PubMed ID: 19672839
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Bayesian dose-finding in phase I/II clinical trials using toxicity and efficacy odds ratios.
Yin G; Li Y; Ji Y
Biometrics; 2006 Sep; 62(3):777-84. PubMed ID: 16984320
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A trivariate continual reassessment method for phase I/II trials of toxicity, efficacy, and surrogate efficacy.
Zhong W; Koopmeiners JS; Carlin BP
Stat Med; 2012 Dec; 31(29):3885-95. PubMed ID: 22807126
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Statistical designs for early phases of cancer clinical trials.
Guan S
J Biopharm Stat; 2012; 22(6):1109-26. PubMed ID: 23075011
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. CRM2DIM: A SAS macro for implementing the dual-agent Bayesian continual reassessment method.
Bayar MA; Ivanova A; Le Teuff G
Comput Methods Programs Biomed; 2019 Jul; 176():211-223. PubMed ID: 31200907
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A Bayesian adaptive design for multi-dose, randomized, placebo-controlled phase I/II trials.
Xie F; Ji Y; Tremmel L
Contemp Clin Trials; 2012 Jul; 33(4):739-48. PubMed ID: 22426247
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Evaluating the performance of copula models in phase I-II clinical trials under model misspecification.
Cunanan K; Koopmeiners JS
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2014 Apr; 14():51. PubMed ID: 24731155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A robust two-stage design identifying the optimal biological dose for phase I/II clinical trials.
Zang Y; Lee JJ
Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(1):27-42. PubMed ID: 27538818
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. A comprehensive comparison of the continual reassessment method to the standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme in Phase I dose-finding studies.
Iasonos A; Wilton AS; Riedel ER; Seshan VE; Spriggs DR
Clin Trials; 2008; 5(5):465-77. PubMed ID: 18827039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
